Literature DB >> 18484785

Adverse drug reaction reporting by patients in the Netherlands: three years of experience.

Joyce de Langen1, Florence van Hunsel, Anneke Passier, Lolkje de Jong-van den Berg, Kees van Grootheest.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There has been discussion about the acceptance of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) reported by patients to spontaneous reporting systems. Lack of experience with patient reporting in real life was one of the main drawbacks in this debate. This study covers 3 years of experience with patient reporting in daily practice. We compared patient reports with reports from healthcare professionals. Although patients have the opportunity to report ADRs in several countries, little is published in the literature about the contribution that patient reports have in practice. To our knowledge, this paper is the first to describe long-term experiences with patient reporting as part of a spontaneous reporting system.
METHODS: The number of reports received, age and sex of the reporters, characteristics of the most frequently reported drugs and characteristics of the ADRs (most frequently reported ADRs, seriousness, outcome) in a 3-year period (April 2004-April 2007) were compared between patient reports and reports from healthcare professionals.
FINDINGS: During this 3-year period, the Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb received 2522 reports directly from patients, concerning 5401 ADRs. In the same period, healthcare professionals submitted 10 635 reports, concerning 16 722 ADRs. Differences were found in the categories of seriousness and outcome of the reported ADRs between patients and healthcare professionals. Conversely, similarities between patient reports and reports from healthcare professionals were found in age, sex, most frequently reported ADRs and most frequently reported drugs.
INTERPRETATION: Our study highlights clearly that valuable differences between ADR reports from patients and reports from healthcare professionals exist. Differences in interpretation by patients and healthcare professionals may cause the observed disparities in seriousness and outcome of reported ADRs. However, the similarities between patient reports and reports from healthcare professionals in most frequently reported ADRs and most frequently reported drugs are striking. After 3 years of experience with patient reporting, we conclude that patient reporting in spontaneous reporting systems is feasible and that it contributes significantly to a reliable pharmacovigilance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18484785     DOI: 10.2165/00002018-200831060-00006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Drug Saf        ISSN: 0114-5916            Impact factor:   5.606


  14 in total

1.  Reporting of adverse drug reactions by nurses.

Authors:  Sally Morrison-Griffiths; Thomas J Walley; B Kevin Park; Alasdair M Breckenridge; Munir Pirmohamed
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2003-04-19       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Risk factors for rhabdomyolysis with simvastatin and atorvastatin.

Authors:  Beatrice Golomb; Marcella Evans
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 5.606

3.  Pharmacogenetics of drug-induced arrhythmias: a feasibility study using spontaneous adverse drug reactions reporting data.

Authors:  Marie L De Bruin; Eugene P van Puijenbroek; Madelon Bracke; Arno W Hoes; Hubert G M Leufkens
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 2.890

Review 4.  Patient reporting of suspected adverse drug reactions: a review of published literature and international experience.

Authors:  A Blenkinsopp; P Wilkie; M Wang; P A Routledge
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 4.335

5.  Octreotide dependency and headache: a case report.

Authors:  A May; S Lederbogen; H C Diener
Journal:  Cephalalgia       Date:  1994-08       Impact factor: 6.292

6.  The clinical characteristics of headache in patients with pituitary tumours.

Authors:  M J Levy; M S Matharu; K Meeran; M Powell; P J Goadsby
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2005-05-11       Impact factor: 13.501

7.  [Direct reporting of side effects by the patient: favourable experience in the first year].

Authors:  A C van Grootheest; J L M Passier; E P van Puijenbroek
Journal:  Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd       Date:  2005-03-05

Review 8.  Consumer adverse drug reaction reporting: a new step in pharmacovigilance?

Authors:  Kees van Grootheest; Linda de Graaf; Lolkje T W de Jong-van den Berg
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 5.606

9.  Dependency and analgesia related to treatment with subcutaneous octreotide in patients with growth hormone-secreting tumors.

Authors:  Ines Donangelo; Melanie Rodacki; Maria Cláudia Peixoto; Mario Vaisman; Nelson R Caldas; Mônica R Gadelha
Journal:  Endocr Pract       Date:  2004 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.443

Review 10.  Patients' role in reporting adverse drug reactions.

Authors:  Kees van Grootheest; Lolkje de Jong-van den Berg
Journal:  Expert Opin Drug Saf       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 4.250

View more
  66 in total

Review 1.  Experiences with adverse drug reaction reporting by patients: an 11-country survey.

Authors:  Florence van Hunsel; Linda Härmark; Shanthi Pal; Sten Olsson; Kees van Grootheest
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2012-01-01       Impact factor: 5.606

2.  How patient reporters identify adverse drug reactions: a qualitative study of reporting via the UK Yellow Card Scheme.

Authors:  Janet Krska; Claire Anderson; Elizabeth Murphy; Anthony J Avery
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2011-05-01       Impact factor: 5.606

3.  Consumers' reports of suspected adverse drug reactions volunteered to a consumer magazine.

Authors:  Lise Aagaard; Ebba Holme Hansen
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 4.335

4.  Monitoring adverse events of the vaccination campaign against influenza A (H1N1) in the Netherlands.

Authors:  Eugène P van Puijenbroek; Nancy Broos; Kees van Grootheest
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2010-12-01       Impact factor: 5.606

5.  Consumer reporting of adverse drug reactions: a retrospective analysis of the Danish adverse drug reaction database from 2004 to 2006.

Authors:  Lise Aagaard; Lars Hougaard Nielsen; Ebba Holme Hansen
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 5.606

6.  Developing a consumer reporting program in Malaysia: a novel initiative to improve pharmacovigilance.

Authors:  Subish Palaian; Mohammed Alshakka
Journal:  Pharm World Sci       Date:  2009-11-06

7.  Adverse drug reactions in the paediatric population in Denmark: a retrospective analysis of reports made to the Danish Medicines Agency from 1998 to 2007.

Authors:  Lise Aagaard; Camilla Blicher Weber; Ebba Holme Hansen
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2010-04-01       Impact factor: 5.606

8.  Adverse drug reaction reporting in the Czech Republic 2005-2009.

Authors:  Eva Kopečná; Veronika Deščíková; Jiří Vlček; Jana Mladá
Journal:  Int J Clin Pharm       Date:  2011-06-16

9.  A nationwide medication incidents reporting system in The Netherlands.

Authors:  Ka-Chun Cheung; Patricia M L A van den Bemt; Marcel L Bouvy; Michel Wensing; Peter A G M De Smet
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2011-08-11       Impact factor: 4.497

10.  Using Facebook to increase spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions.

Authors:  Marinela Z Knezevic; Ivana C Bivolarevic; Tanja S Peric; Slobodan M Jankovic
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2011-04-01       Impact factor: 5.606

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.